↓ Skip to main content

Usefulness of using laser-induced photoacoustic measurement and 3.0 Tesla MRI to assess knee cartilage damage: a comparison study

Overview of attention for article published in Arthritis Research & Therapy, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Usefulness of using laser-induced photoacoustic measurement and 3.0 Tesla MRI to assess knee cartilage damage: a comparison study
Published in
Arthritis Research & Therapy, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13075-015-0899-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Taku Ukai, Masato Sato, Miya Ishihara, Munetaka Yokoyama, Tomonori Takagaki, Genya Mitani, Yoshiki Tani, Tomohiro Yamashita, Yutaka Imai, Joji Mochida

Abstract

T2 mapping is an MRI method particularly reflective of the collagen arrangement in the cartilage, and diffusion tensor (DT) imaging captures the diffusion of water molecules. Laser-induced photoacoustic measurement (LIPA) makes it possible to assess not only the thickness of the cartilage layer but also its viscoelastic properties. By assessing cartilage damage assessment using LIPA and 3.0 Tesla MRI (T2 mapping and DT imaging), this study investigates the usefulness of the various methods. The International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) classification was used to classify 29 bone cartilage pieces excised during surgical procedures. At the same time, LIPA was performed at sites matching the area of cartilage damage. MRI was performed preoperatively to measure the T2 and the apparent diffusion coefficient. In addition, tissue sections for histological assessment using the Mankin score were prepared for each ICRS grade, and the results with the various methods were compared. With DT imaging, significant differences were observed in all grades (P < 0.01). With T2 mapping, significant differences were observed in all grades except for grade 1 versus grade 2 (P < 0.01). With LIPA, significant differences were observed in ICRS grade 1 versus grade 3 (P < 0.05), grade 1 versus grade 4 (P < 0.01), grade 2 versus grade 4 (P < 0.01), and grade 3 versus grade 4 (P < 0.05). With the Mankin score, significant differences were observed in ICRS grade 1 versus grade 3 (P < 0.01), grade 1 versus grade 4 (P < 0.01), grade 2 versus grade 4 (P < 0.01), and grade 3 versus grade 4 (P < 0.01). Correlations were observed in all combinations of ICRS grade with DT imaging, T2 mapping, LIPA, and Mankin score. Correlations were observed between the degree of histological degeneration and DT imaging, T2 mapping, and ICRS grade, but LIPA had a weaker correlation than MRI. In the assessment of knee osteoarthritis, there are instances where it is difficult to assess the damaged cartilage site with MRI alone, and we believe that it is desirable to use a combination of LIPA and MRI.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
Unknown 25 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 19%
Researcher 5 19%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Student > Postgraduate 3 12%
Professor 2 8%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 5 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 8%
Engineering 2 8%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 5 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 January 2016.
All research outputs
#1,397,467
of 12,451,992 outputs
Outputs from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#371
of 1,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,086
of 346,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#93
of 315 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,451,992 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,983 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 346,559 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 315 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.